Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:28:25.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of piglets weaned from sows fed diets supplemented with conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) to an Escherichia coli K88+ oral challenge

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2008

R. Patterson ,
M. L. Connor ,
D. O. Krause  and
C. M. Nyachoti
R. Patterson
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, R3 T 2N2
M. L. Connor
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, R3 T 2N2
D. O. Krause
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, R3 T 2N2
C. M. Nyachoti*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, R3 T 2N2
*
E-mail: martin_nyachoti@umanitoba.ca
Get access

Abstract

Seventy-eight Cotswold piglets weaned from sows receiving 0% or 2% conjugated linoleic acid (CLA)-supplemented rations from day 85 of gestation through lactation were allocated to nursery diets (ND) according to their dam’s lactation ration (LR) as follows (1) 0%-0% (0% CLA LR: 0% CLA ND, n = 17); (2) 0%-2% (0% CLA LR: 2% CLA ND, n = 17); (3) 2%-0% (2% CLA LR: 0% CLA ND, n = 23); and (4) 2%-2% (2% CLA LR: 2% CLA ND, n = 21). At 28 ± 2 days of age all piglets received an oral Escherichia coli K88+ (enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli, ETEC) challenge and were subsequently monitored for scour development and overall health until 36 ± 2 days of age, after which blood and tissue samples were collected. Piglet BW was not affected by dietary CLA supplementation to LR (P > 0.05). However, by day 36 piglets receiving 2% CLA-supplemented ND were significantly lighter (P < 0.05) than piglets receiving control diets. Average daily gain and feed efficiency were not affected by CLA supplementation. Average daily feed intake (ADFI) was greater for piglets weaned from 2% CLA-supplemented sows from day 17 to 28 (P < 0.05), otherwise ADFI was unaffected by dietary CLA supplementation (P > 0.05). The development of scours was less severe in piglets weaned from 2% CLA-supplemented sows at 8, 24, 48 and 56 h after ETEC challenge (P < 0.05). Intestinal coliform and lactic acid bacteria populations post challenge were not affected by CLA supplementation. However, cecal ammonia-N was numerically greatest in 0%-0% piglets compared to the other treatment groups, and the total volatile fatty acid production was numerically lower in 0%-0% and 0%-2% piglets compared to 2%-0% and 2%-2% piglets. In addition, piglets weaned from 2% CLA-supplemented sows had increased serum immunoglobulin A (P < 0.001) and G (P < 0.05) levels and reduced (P < 0.05) intestinal mucosal inflammation compared to piglets weaned from control sows. Although there were no obvious additional health effects observed when CLA was provided in ND, supplementing sow rations with 2% CLA from mid-gestation through weaning appears to have immune-stimulating carry-over effects post weaning. Thus, supplementing sow rations with CLA may be a practical strategy for enhancing passive immune transfer and improving the immune status and overall gut health of nursery piglets.

Keywords

CLApassive immunitypigletssows
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 2 , Issue 9 , September 2008 , pp. 1303 - 1311
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amezcua, R, Friendship, RM, Dewey, CE, Gyles, C, Fairbrother, JM 2002. Presentation of postweaning E. coli diarrhea in southern Ontario, prevalence of hemolytic E. coli serogroups involved, and their antimicrobial resistance patterns. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 66, 73–78.Google ScholarPubMed
Banni, S 2002. Conjugated linoleic acid metabolism. Current Opinion in Lipidology 13, 261–266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bassaganya-Riera, J, Hontecillas, R 2006. CLA and n-3 PUFA differentially modulate clinical activity and colonic PPAR-responsive gene expression in a pig model of experimental IBD. Clinical Nutrition 25, 454–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassaganya-Riera, J, Hontecillas-Magarzo, R, Bregendahl, K, Wannemuehler, MJ, Zimmerman, DR 2001. Effects of dietary conjugated linoleic acid in nursery pigs of dirty and clean environments on growth, empty body composition, and immune competence. Journal of Animal Science 79, 714–721.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bee, G 2000a. Dietary conjugated linoleic acids alter adipose tissue and milk lipids of pregnant and lactating sows. Journal of Nutrition 130, 2292–2298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bee, G 2000b. Dietary conjugated linoleic acid consumption during pregnancy and lactation influences growth and tissue composition in weaned pigs. Journal of Nutrition 130, 2981–2989.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belury, MA 2002. Dietary conjugated linoleic acid in health: physiological effects and mechanisms of action. Annual Review of Nutrition 22, 505–531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bontempo, V, Sciannimanico, D, Pastorelli, G, Rossi, R, Rosi, F, Corino, C 2004. Dietary conjugated linoleic acid postively affects immunological variables in lactating sows and piglets. Journal of Nutrition 134, 817–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulgarella, JA, Patton, D, Bull, AW 2001. Modulation of prostaglandin H synthase activity by conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and specific CLA isomers. Lipids 36, 407–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Canadian Council on Animal Care 1993. Guide to care and use of experimental animals, vol. 1. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
Changhua, L, Jindong, Y, Defa, L, Lidan, Z, Shiyan, Q, Jianjun, X 2005. Conjugated linoleic acid attenuates the production and gene expression of proinflammatory cytokines in weaned pigs challenged with lipopolysaccharide. Journal of Nutrition 135, 239–244.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Haan, L, Hirst, TR 2004. Cholera toxin: a paradigm for multi-functional engagement of cellular mechanisms. Molecular Membrane Biology 21, 77–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dierick, NA, Vervaeke, IJ, Decuypere, JA, Henderickx, HK 1986. Influence of the flora and of some growth-promoting feed additives on nitrogen metabolism in pigs. I. Studies in vitro. Livestock Production Science 14, 161–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drew, MD, Owen, BD 1988. The provision of passive immunity to colostrum-deprived piglets by bovine or porcine serum immunoglobulins. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68, 1277–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, SA 2002. Perinatal mortality in the pig: environmental or physiological solutions? Livestock Production Science 78, 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairbrother, JM, Nadeau, E, Gyles, CL 2005. E. coli in postweaning diarrhea in pigs: an update on bacterial types, pathogenesis, and prevention strategies. Animal Health Research Reviews 6, 17–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folch, J, Lees, M, Stanley, GHS 1956. A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues. Journal of Biological Chemistry 226, 497–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hontecillas, R, Wannemeulher, MJ, Zimmerman, DR, Hutto, DL, Wilson, JH, Ahn, DU, Bassaganya-Riera, J 2002. Nutritional regulation of porcine bacterial-induced colitis by conjugated linoleic acid. Journal of Nutrition 132, 2019–2027.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knapp, HR, Melly, MA 1986. Bactericidal effects of polyunsaturated fatty acids. Journal of Infectious Diseases 154, 84–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kotlowski R, Bernstein CN, Sepehri S and Krause DO 2006. High prevalence of E. coli belonging to the B2+D phylogenetic group of inflammatory bowel disease. Gut (Online pub.) Available: http://gut.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/gut.2006.099796v1. Accessed 19.12.2006.Google Scholar
Krause, DO, Easter, RA, White, BA, Mackie, RI 1995. Effect of weaning diet on the ecology of adherent Lactobacilli in the gastrointestinal tract of the pig. Journal of Animal Science 73, 2347–2354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Dividich, JA, Rooke, A, Herpin, P 2005. Nutritional and immunological importance of colostrum for the new-born pig. Journal of Agricultural Science 143, 1–17.Google Scholar
Marquardt, RR, Jin, LZ, Kim, JW, Fang, L, Frohlich, AA, Baidoo, SK 1999. Passive protective effect of egg-yolk antibodies against enterotoxigenic E. coli K88+infection in neonatal and early-weaned piglets. FEMS Immunology and Medical Microbiology 23, 283–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mestecky, J, Russell, MW, Elson, CO 1999. Intestinal IgA: novel views on its function in the defense of the largest mucosal surface. Gut 44, 2–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Research Council 1998. Nutrient Requirements of Swine, 10th edition. Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Novozamsky, I, Van Eck, R, Showenburg, JCH, Walinga, F 1974. Total nitrogen determination in plant material by means of the indole-phenol blue method. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 22, 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyachoti, CM, Omogbenigun, FO, Rademacher, M, Blank, G 2006. Performance responses and indicators of gastrointestinal health in early weaned pigs fed low-protein amino acid-supplemented diets. Journal of Animal Science 84, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Shea, M, Bassaganya-Riera, J, Mohede, ICM 2004. Immunomodulatory properties of conjugate linoleic acid. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 79, 1199S–1206S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Owusu-Asiedu, A, Nyachoti, CM, Baidoo, SK, Marquardt, RR, Yang, X 2003a. Response of early-weaned pigs to an enterotoxigenic E. coli (K88) challenge when fed diets containing spray-dried porcine plasma or pea protein isolate plus egg yolk antibody. Journal of Animal Science 81, 1781–1789.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Owusu-Asiedu, A, Nyachoti, CM, Marquardt, RR 2003b. Response of early-weaned pigs to an enterotoxigenic E. coli (K88) challenge when fed diets containing spray-dried porcine plasma or pea protein isolate plus egg yolk antibody, zinc oxide, fumaric acid, or antibiotic. Journal of Animal Science 81, 1790–1798.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Partanen, KH, Mroz, Z 1999. Organic acids for performance enhancement in pig diets. Nutrition Research Reviews 12, 117–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patterson R 2006. The effect of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) on sow and litter immune status and performance. M.Sc., University of Manitoba, Canada.Google Scholar
Rooke, JA, Bland, IM 2002. The acquisition of passive immunity in the new-born piglet. Livestock Production Science 78, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, H 1999. The mammary gland and neonate mucosal immunity. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology 72, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slevin, J, Wiseman, J 2003. Physiological development in the gilt. In Perspectives in pig science (ed. J Wiseman, MA Varley and B Kemp), pp. 293–332. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, England.Google Scholar
Weber, TE, Schinckel, AP, Houseknecht, KL, Richert, BT 2001. Evaluation of conjugated linoleic acid and dietary antibiotics as growth promotants in weanling pigs. Journal of Animal Science 79, 2542–2549.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed